#and assume this is an attack on trans women for some reason

[spitblaze]

if you genuinely think that transmascs and trans men trying to talk about their issues with their own terms is transmisogynistic or 'mens rights activism 2.0' i genuinely and kindly invite you to maybe like. idk. consider that someone identifying with masculinity doesnt prevent them from facing unique forms of descrimination

[mr-ribbit]

this isn't meant to soften or reduce the objective transmisogyny + additional hate action going into this, but since the people running these harassment campaigns are acting like they're literal baby children who need their hands held to understand anything, maybe this needs to be said:

what you're doing and how you treat trans women on this website is fucking MEAN. if you want to sit there and honestly convince yourself that you're *not* a transmisogynist or a transphobe or a misogynist or any other type of bigot - like if you genuinely believe that and are confused why people are calling you these things - then maybe we need to start from little primary colored building blocks and tell you that you're being fucking mean and rude and actively harmful to real people who read the things you say. im not sure why we need to start off with "trans women have feelings" - just kidding I know exactly why we need to - but maybe you don't.

no matter who you're talking to, do you honestly think accusing someone you do not know of being a pedophile, en masse, behind their back /and/ in a public forum, is a reasonable way to treat someone for making a tumblr post about video games or political opinions? even if you strongly disagree with the post, you think someone deserves to be treated like that by people they don't know? take a second please and sincerely imagine how that would feel. wouldn't it be scary? wouldn't you wonder who the people were who thought this about you - if they're people you know - if they're just a few people that will continue saying mean things to you forever or if there are thousands of people who choose to dedicate their time and energy specifically to making you feel bad? if you accidentally write a post in the wrong tone or unknowingly interact with a shitty person, that there are uncountable people that will keep track of that just to hurt you later? that's fucking horrifying

and to zone in on what's specifically happening here: do you think randomly accusing people of being pedophiles or sexual abusers has no effect on them? like a lot of you tend to excuse yourself in these discussions by saying "I didn't actually see the context of what they were saying" or "I didn't see that they apologized already" or "I didn't actually understand the post was a joke" or whatever other kneejerk response to make sure *you* aren't seen as a bad person. do you realize that makes you look even meaner? you didn't bother to actually follow up on a thought you had about someone before sending them hateful messages or making public accusations about them? those actions are harmful whether or not you like the victim at the end of the day.

believe it or not some people you send this shit to are survivors of abuse themselves, or have their own historical personal reasons to be weighing in on a touchy subject. when you baselessly decide it's ok to call someone an abuser of any type, that person is probably *also* disgusted by whatever horrible shit you're accusing them of. as someone that hates these things as much as you do in order to attack someone for them: what do you think it's like to have complete strangers think that about you? how many eggshells would you walk on if random people thought so little of you that they were ok doing this?

it's mean. it's heinous, cruel bullying, and if you genuinely think you are not doing it from a place of transmisogyny or hatefuk bias over the victims' identity, then you need to understand that that's not an excuse. "i didn't even know she was trans" ok, it was still mean to call her a pedophile with 200 of your closest friends in public. "im trans so it can't be transphobia" ok it was still mean to assume someone was endorsing abuse when they were talking about being accused of abuse. "i didn't see the post where she said it was a joke" ok it was still mean to actively harass someone without bothering to look into the full context.

at the end of the day, yes, obviously I still think you're all transmisogynist assholes who are clearly willing to gang up on a woman who has nothing to do with your problems simply because she dared to speak on them. i think you're bigoted and unwilling to examine that if it means giving up your vitriol against someone who doesn't like your favorite video game or whatever excuse of the week. but like even if you were just doing it for love of the hate game, it's fucking weird heinous shit and i hope you're happy having that be a central part of your life

to be clear: im not transfemme and if I'm overstepping or talking over anyone please let me know. im not speaking for anyone's actual experiences except my own, which is the experience of being angry at how much literal bullying and harassment I see excused on this so-called progressive queer blogging website

[gougarfem]

so many of the trans community's arguments fall apart when questioned but nobody is willing to sit down and follow through a conversation about it. for example, i can't count the number of times i've been told i need to educate myself and talk to trans people and then i won't be such a hateful terf. when i say to these people, i am educated, i came out as trans ten years ago, i'm on testosterone, i live the same reality as a transgender man - i still don't believe you can change your biology, and i still think men and women are socialised differently and gender is a patriarchal construct, and changing your gender only serves to reinforce that construct - what now? now that you understand i'm like you, i'm not hateful, i just don't share your beliefs, do my opinions hold some validity? invariably i get blocked, told that i must be lying about my own dysphoria, or branded some flavour of -phobic. if the trans community wants to be taken seriously they need to address their collective fear of being questioned or divulging from the acceptable narrative. they need to be able to have conversations where the other person uses 'incorrect' language or questions something that should be a god-given truth (ie. trans women are women) without shutting that person down or deflecting with accusations of hatred and transphobia. i am yet to find a single trans person willing to sit down and talk to me and defend their own views in a reasonable manner - instead, i get accused of things they assume radical feminists do and believe (wanting trans people dead, hating gnc women, upholding racist beauty standards), receive personal attacks on myself and often my disability and ethnicity, or most commonly just get blocked. i believe anyone is entitled to hold any opinion, but when you're demanding everyone else adhere to that opinion you need to be able to defend it, be open to criticism and be able to explain exactly why you believe what you do without using roundabout logic. do better.

[trans-androgyne]

tbh i fucking hate the terms tme/tma because it just centers one oppressed group while disregarding the other. transmisogyny is important to discuss but it's also important to talk about transmisandry/transandrophobia??? and it's hurtful that one is seemingly placed as more important than the other, as if trans fems' pain is more important than anybody else's, as if we're not all in this together!! trans fems can be more visible sometimes which may lead to more attacks, but trans mascs' invisibility is not good either and doesn't protect as much as people think and frankly makes it so much worse in many cases. just. hate the binary of it. when it's so much more complicated. also one of the arguments i've heard is that transmisandry can't exist bcs misandry doesn't, as in men don't suffer from patriarchy which???? i can't agree with this notion. men may not suffer from it in the same way or to the same extent, but toxic masculinity is a term for a reason!!! "boys shouldn't cry", "boys shouldn't have these and those interests", "boys shouldn't act like this and that". people will often say that it's a derivation from misogyny bcs they're seen as lowering themselves to the level of 'weaker gender' when they shouldn't according to society's standards, but like. when girls are told that they shouldn't act so and so bcs it's 'boyish' and 'unbecoming of her' we still call it misogyny. in patriarchy women are often seen as frail and weak but men are often seen as brutish and cold n aggressive. patriarchists may call both of the gender 'dumb' and 'stupid' when it suits their needs because it's built on hypocrisy and pretending otherwise is ignoring the root of the problem.

Yeah, it’s really clear that some people use tme/tma because they believe transmisogyny to be the worst possible oppression, while the transphobia faced by trans men and mascs is assumed to barely affect them in comparison, since it’s “just transphobia” or “just misogyny” when they’re treated similarly to women. A lot of intracommunity transandrophobia seems to stem from the people not understanding/refusing to believe that men and mascs (and people perceived as such) can very much experience sexism and even gendered oppression. Cis men face sexism when they’re told they can’t have been the victim of domestic violence, especially at the hands of a woman. Trans men and mascs experience gendered oppression as their maleness/masculinity is non-normative and marginalizes them—makes them transgender. That can all be true without implying that we don’t live under a patriarchy/that hegemonic manhood isn’t privileged over other genders.

[eccentricphilosoph]

This is a reply I saw a transwoman make on post of a question by a transwoman. It’s a side that a lot of people who are LGBT allies don't see. Many people who have been trans for many years now are feeling rejected by either side. I've seen more and more people who are talking about this. It's sad and these people deserve a listen. I've even heard some people who are more afraid than they have been before of the uprising of people against trans people due to the unrest that "activists" have caused (this is in their own words, don't shoot the messenger).

There are actual trans people who are being called both transphobic and being called predators on each side. It's just not right.

Called transphobic for challenging the idea that trans women are women, for example. Some believe trans women/men are trans women/men as a separate entity from cis women/men in terms of experience and biology and don't see this as a disadvantage. Of course, they should still be seen as women/men in their daily lives and many shouldn’t have to identify as “trans” openly when it’s not necessary. This is something to think on as trans people still need a safe space too.

*again, don't shoot the messenger. These aren't my beliefs. I'm just stating what these people are saying and that I believe they shouldn't be invalidated by either side, assuming their reasoning is sound. I'm encouraging myself and others to think more critically as I always do on my page.

Furthermore, while I fully understand how many think this sort of thinking will cause those who oppose trans people overall to invalidate or attack trans people, I don't think it's a reason to block out the voices of trans people who maintain these thoughts and feelings. If they feel it would cause them to be more unsafe, I doubt they would express these thoughts. I know this isn't a one size fits all situation, so please don't think of this in an "all or nothing" sort of way.

I’m open to listening to trans people who have different ideas and perspectives moreso than someone who isn’t trans, even if they’re an “ally”.

[animentality]

Please stop intentionally strawmanning transphobes it's actually so bad for trans people

I'm not straw manning transphobes, they're clowning in MY inbox and in my posts, lol.

You think I dragged those arguments out of my ass?

Terfs call me a dress wearing pedophile every time I so much as suggest trans people don't deserve the shit they get.

That's why I make a post saying that to terfs, wearing a dress is somehow shameful or embarrassing for a "man."

Because for some fucking reason, they're just convinced all trans women are just "men wearing dresses" and they're all pedophiles.

The fuck are you doing, assuming I'm the one who's attacking terfs just for fun, lol?

Anything I've ever said about terfs came from some bullshit they SENT ME.

Or commented on an otherwise random post about how gender is fluid.

This fucking ask, man...

[cedarnommer]

There's a big and frankly stupid debate about trans women in sports and how we're supposedly predisposed to win in sports. I'll talk personal experiences rather than some big research. Not that people that hate trans women care for what we say, but I digress.

Prior to being on HRT, my body had a far higher nmol of t than actual cis men. It hovered between 230 and was almost above 250. The dysphoria I felt from that was awful. I was aware that at some point I had the crazy ability to just repeat a physical exercise a bunch and get muscular rapidly. I always avoided arm exercises yet I could lift up fairly heavy things. After starting estrogen, I noticed that I got weaker. After I started taking t blockers, it became significantly more apparent. Groceries of 5-10 kg that became easier to carry around now feel like me trying to carry them in my preteens to early puberty time.

None of this is to say cis women are weaker. Since our bodies are not absolutes and some cis men have lower t and some cis women higher t. But, trans women are likely to be taking some form of t blockers if transitioning. And this does affect our physical strength a lot.

The sports discourse is a fascinating intellectual tool used by actual sexists. It isn't necessarily just transmysogynist in its structure. The core argument made is that women are more physically weak than men. Therefore women need intervention so that they're protected from the physically superior men. It asserts that a patriarchal hierarchy is natural and actually beneficial to women. And I feel like it's this logical tool which tricks people into assuming this is to their benefit. We're nothing but a tool for actual cis men to assert themselves and gain power. So people that use the label feminist yet defend these actions aren't all that feministic. It reminds me of how many issues second wave feminism had in the US due to excluding non white women and lesbians. This isn't real feminism in this case. It gives acknowledgement that men are indeed superior and all feminism amounts to is an idea to beg and seek approval of spaces that men decided for women.

But all I hear is how we, trans women, dominate women's sports. Most of us can't even lift a bag of groceries well, let alone dream of doing this. The other rhetorical reasoning behind this is to belittle and attack our femininity as trans people. Our womanhood is denied while we're also called failed males. And ya know, this rhetorical idea was used by white feminists in the past to deny non-white women too. You're not the defender of women you think you are, if you're not seeking genuine liberation from this garbage gendered system.

But what do I know. I'm just the supposed weak "man" that's also somehow super powerful and superior to cis women. I'm also supposedly having a super imposing male privilege because everything I say is heard and enforced over cis women while people debate my literal right to pee in a public restroom.

Do I feel privileged and mighty? No. And I certainly doubt I can overpower cis women. And to be quite honest, I don't understand why I'm supposed to. I've never understood why men have this idea of domination and aggression. That should hint to you that I'm not a man.

Trans rights. Women's rights. The ghouls that enforce all this suffering can go to hell.

[redditreceipts]

I read your pinned post and was wondering, when you say you support dysphoric transitioned people as long as they don't use opposite sex spaces, what are your feelings on trans people who are "stealth"? Either for safety reasons or convenience or what have you. I'm new to radfem tumblr and am still forming opinions myself.

hey :) so this is an interesting question.

I think first of all, there should be some kind of legislation that takes away civil rights from sex offenders. Sex offenders, for example, should be prohibited from going into so-called "vulnerable spaces" like changing rooms and bathrooms (for any sex), places with a lot of children etc. This should also be supervised closely, of course. That would prevent males who are sex offenders from going into women's spaces at all. (Sex offenders also shouldn't be allowed to transition imo)

Secondly, I think that there are two types of sex-segregated spaces. One I would call the kind of space where you can choose to go or not to go, like for example a convention for lesbians, a gay bar for only gay men, a women's only event etc. There is no good reason in my opinion for a transgender person, stealth or not, to go to any of those events for the sex that they do not belong to. You can freely choose to not go to a lesbian's event as a straight trans-identified male, so I would assume that it isn't for you and you can go to another open event instead of going into another person's space.

But there is also the second type of sex-segregated space; the type of space where you can't just choose to not go. This would be things like public bathrooms, prisons, changing rooms etc. And there, I think that we should work on creating third spaces for people who are transitioning, like single-stall bathrooms or changing rooms, or an extra section in the men's prison for men who are likely to be attacked by other men (like gay men or transitioning males). So what should be done in the meantime? 1. we have to work on the main problem here, which is male violence. There has to be a legal system in place that consequently punishes males who attack transwomen because they don't want them in their restrooms 2. there has to be a more realistic concept of "passing". I see mtfs on reddit all the time talking on how much they love passing, but then I click on their profiles and they don't even remotely pass 😭

So okay, after these points have been adressed, I think that a person should use the space that causes the least amount of upset. I don't think that there is a perfect response because in this society, there is still a lot of bigotry and male violence.

[dianight]

Not directed at anyone in particular

...but rather because I keep seeing related stuff constantly.

Once you change your mentality, once you internalize that being a trans woman is not a bad thing but rather something good and to be desired, it'll be as if you automatically learn a new language, or more accurately learn how to decypher a code in front of you.

Said code being a metaphor, obviously, for the clear disdain and way more often than I'd like or I'd ever imagined outright hatred that people seem to have for trans women.

You read something that's palpably transmisogynistic and it's undoubtedly clear what the person who wrote wants to say, but needs a few logic jumps and beating around the bush since stating it plainly will be too blunt. You think, "am I reading this in bad faith or is this person hating on trans women?" You spend a few minutes trying to come up with some explanation of how this person typed what can only be interpreted as "being a trans woman is HORRIBLE" without spelling it out and eventually you accept that it's just transmisogyny, no matter how you spin it.

You keep seeing similar shit. You get literal poll data that screams what you already know: the average (ignoring sampling bias for a moment) tumblr user thinks being a trans woman is bad. You keep seeing harrassment campaings by hate groups targeting trans women. You keep seeing them get driven out of platforms that some (many?) of them need to get funds to live. You keep seeing absurd escalation only and only ever against transfems. You keep seeing the same blogs (already blocked) that start witch hunts or pile on them reblogging funny memes as usual. You keep seeing random trans women getting terminated for no reason, for minor reasons that literally any other demographic can get away with, for being the target (not instigator) of those same witch hunts.

Sure, telling people off can get out of hand after you get hatemail for days, weeks, months and maybe even years. Trans women are expected to always be ready to debate our right to exist at any given moment and endure all the random poking and insults all the while remaining civil. [<- See that? A bit of trickery, not quite a lie but not true either. Trans women are NOT expected to do all that. That's simply an excuse for when the time comes when a woman tells some random anon off, she gets reported and terminated. We are just illustrating the point about seeing the "code" here.]

And after many years of seeing the vitriol that gets thrown our way, after seeing all the excuses (the same ones, over and over), after seeing who gets driven out of communities and why, and who drives us out; after you see groups of women clearly explain "this happens because transmisogyny"and then being ignored, silenced and attacked; you eventually realize that you and the people who hate you just have a different perspective when it comes to trans women.

You (I) think that being a trans woman is good, and at worst a neutral aspect of who you are. Those who you (I) have seen over the years harassing, attacking and mocking trans women just think that being a trans woman is bad at best, and at worst it's something to be erradicated. They make it very clear if you pay a minimum of attention to their actions.

So whenever I see reblogs complaining about callouts and shit; well, you can't really stop them from happening (as an individual) but it does make me happy that I never see them since I block anyone who reblogs them. Whenever I see discourse (<- not my word) about eggs (<- recent), about calling yourself transfem when you are afab (<- less recent), about whatever fetish some popular (<- I assume) trans woman just happens to be into and magically it becomes the most terrible thing you can possibly get the hots for; I see it for what it truly is:

Excuses to hate on trans women. And in order to love every trans woman before it's too late people need to stop hating them first.

[micah-write]

Part 3 chapter 3

If I feel like the panels aren't well executed I'll say it so until I say otherwise assume it's a well made panel .

Despite rusty trying to depict transwoman as innate savages she still depict them as quite calm individuals , also it still baffles me that the trans woman are the only truly hairy ones , so far no other characters has been showed with diverse hairyness

The antisemitism get worst in every panel , instead of feeling unsettling and scary it just feels grotesque and a déjà vu scenario that happened plenty of time trough media . They keep using ethnic traits to look demonizing as much as they can be .

The traits are all so exaggerated while all the women are pretty small ladies with no imperfections. It's really an attack to ethnic traits whether rusty realize it or not .

Following theses panels rusty will use the arguments that since some trans folks misgender and dehumanize transphobes it's ok to do the same . It is not, dehumanizing the people you don't like is dangerous for various reasons as it leads to hate crime and genocides in the worst cases (yes among the genocides and mass murder I include feminicides and queer genocide)

As for the second image I find it hypocritical from rusty and her fellow terfs to qualify any gnc men of trans woman and making fun of them , no they are not appropriating womanhood, they're normalizing the use of gendered things , gnc people exist outside of lesbians , rusty .

Rusty admit here ITS INSULTING TO NOT RESPECT SOMEONE PRONOUNS . Rusty is hypocritical until the end and she doesn't care because she has been conditioned into hateful beliefs. Yes hateful beliefs because so far I haven't met one terfs that can truly be respectful of people that disagree with them . Can trans people be hateful too as individuals? Of course . But terfs are radical . And in radicalism I don't know one movement that isn't fueled by thr Hate of something or someone .

Rusty was stubborn enough to keep demonize their traits instead of making the situation truly threatening. The ridiculous way they are portrayed overtake any message she meant to portray here as she cannot portray people in a respectful manner . You can't dehumanize someone and hope being taken seriously unless by people who hate theses people as well , you know you did a good job when regardless of the belief the scene is felt the way you meant to portray .

The amount of line lead to make us think she pushed her with force and quickly. It would've been better to put less lines in order to show properly how fast she touched her . And here again we are faced with blatant dehumanization . Not a good depiction of a scary situation.

...what ??? 😭😭 why is Jaden assaulting someone that did nothing . It doesn't make any sense ???

[drbased]

Another Takedown: We're with the big boys, now!

So I happened to spy a copy of the International Socialism journal, issue 157 published in Winter 2018. On the front cover there is a rainbow trans symbol and the title of one of the chapters: Marxism, feminism and transgender politics by Sue Caldwell. I thought wow, this is it, this a defense of genderism within a socialist framework. This'll be my undoing, finally I'll be able to recognise that my terfism is wrong. This isn't randos on tumblr anymore. So, I buy it, turn to page 25, and begin my journey.

And gyns, if you've read those randos on tumblr, I can assure you that there is nothing new here. I'm going to take apart this whole thing. So this is gonna be a long one, folks.

In August 2017 Donald Trump tweeted that transgender people1 were no longer welcome in the military because they are a “burden” due to “tremendous medical costs and disruption”.2 This was the latest in a series of attacks on transgender people which include attempts to overturn legislation that allows people to use the toilet for their preferred gender. Transgender people face the threat of violent attack; 2017 is on course to see the highest recorded number of killings of transgender people in the United States.3 In the UK transphobic hate crime has tripled in the last five years, while prosecution rates have dropped and transgender people report lack of trust in the police. More than a third of transgender employees say they had to leave their job due to discrimination in 2016.4 A survey released by Stonewall reports that eight out of ten trans school and college pupils had self-harmed and 45 percent had tried to take their own lives.5

1 I am using trans or transgender as an umbrella term to denote people whose gender identity does not match their birth sex, and this includes non-binary and gender fluid identities. When I use trans man or trans woman I am referring to people who have transitioned from female to male (ftm) or male to female (mtf) respectively, regardless of whether they have had any medical intervention. I am aware that these terms are contested and that meanings may change over time. 2 Thanks to Alex Callinicos, Joseph Choonara, Gareth Jenkins, Laura Miles, Sheila McGregor, Judith Orr and Camilla Royle for their comments on this article in draft. 3 Human Rights Campaign, 2017. 4 Yeung, 2016. 5 Weale, 2017.

Hmm. So, right off the back, I think it's a bit of a reach to describe 'banning from military' as an 'attack' on transgender people. I mean, first of all, you're a socialist journal. You're supposed to be materialists, right? Not being made to fight in a war is saving someone from an attack. I know this is a nitpick, but this is what we do, here: we deconstruct narratives and analyse how rhetoric is employed to achieve an affect. A socialist journal uncritically parroting liberal, egalitarian rhetoric? Love to see it.

Now, the '2017 is on course to see the highest reorded number of killings of transgender people in the United States'. So, first of all, kinda curious there's no number used here, right? Why not use it? This is clearly, off the bat, a persuasive piece, so really go for it. The statistics and facts are on your side, right? So what's that really hard-hitting number? 29. Up from 23.

'Some of these cases involve clear anti-transgender bias. In others, the victim’s transgender status may have put them at risk in other ways, such as forcing them into homelessness.'

Hmm. Look, I'm not going to belabour this point, because it's been done by better people elsewhere. Statistically, that's not a significantly high number, even for the transgender population. And it's nothing compared to the murder of women and girls in the same year. But let's talk about what's not being said, here:

Considering how little it takes for a person to ID as trans, there's no reason to assume these people were presenting in any way that makes them a target.

To belabour that point, you guys know we still live in a homophobic society, right? You guys know that homophobic violence still exists? How can you be sure that the motivations have anything to do with gender and not sexuality, considering how often those two things end up being linked?

As better women than me have pointed out, black transgender women in prostitution have the highest murder rate. That's a lot of overlapping risk factors. And in this statistic, a good number of these are people of colour, specifically black people.

Including killings of transgender men is really, really icky, considering how we already have an epidemic of violence against women. But it makes up the numbers. Because, for all the supposed compassion for trans people, this is more of a numbers game than anything else; a desperation to prove the unprovable. And even then, when you make the bar to entry this low, the numbers still aren't particularly powerful enough, so instead they're obfuscated with a really lazy 'highest recorded number of killings'.

A similar rhetorical tactic is used with 'In the UK transphobic hate crime has tripled in the last five years'. So, I couldn't find the source for this one, but you know what I did find?

The law recognises five types of hate crime on the basis of: Race Religion  Disability Sexual orientation  Transgender identity

HOLY

SHIT

BATMAN

MISOGYNY ISN'T EVEN CONSIDERED A HATE CRIME IN MY COUNTRY???????? Transgender people have only been in the public eye for less than a decade whereas FIFTY PERCENT OF THE POPULATION, A POPULATION KNOWN TO BE VIEWED AS PROPERTY SINCE THE BEGINNING OF RECORDED HUMAN HISTORY, DON'T HAVE A RECORD OF HATE CRIMES AGAINST US IN THIS COUNTRY?

ARE

YOU

FUCKING KIDDING ME????

OK, WE NEED TO STOP RIGHT HERE, I'M DONE BEING COY.

Is there anything we can do about this? Is there anyone in the UK who knows anything about the law who can help get misogyny recognised as a hate crime?

[coulsonlives]

Mkayy, I just saw the most insane post about a Trolls character make the rounds. As a queer person in fandom, that's a perfect example of how some people in fandom really gotta chill! Especially when most of those people are like in their early 20s. I have no horse in this race but even I think it's insane.

So this post said 'floyd and veneer' (two Trolls characters I assume, I don't watch Trolls lol) are 'gay coded, and to stop shipping floyd with women' because of that. Because 'representation is important'.

Really?? Are we really gonna do this virtue-signally, instant outrage BS for a millionth time??

This is a kid's show, the canon will literally always be there regardless of random fans changing things in the background! It doesn't affect representation, not where it matters. And if you act like it does, that's how you end up with incidents where gay, trans, and queer people write/draw oodles of gay characters, the same as they are in canon, but as soon as they change aspects of one hot-button character (for example floyd and veneer), maybe because they just don't wanna write/draw every single character as queer, people explode and harass em, because they think it's a big insult for representation and they're a horrible person and how dare they be homophobic etc etc. Meanwhile the fic in question has like 3 kudos and a comment.

Not to mention, if you need to educate people on why a character is gay coded, regardless of whether they are or not, that's just admitting to the fact there will be people who see them otherwise. An earring on the right ear? A het person will just see it as an earring!! This shit doesn't stand out to everyone. If you see it, great, but step off and stop attacking people for not seeing it. Nobody has a responsibility to look up details of a character to ensure/confirm it isn't symbolic of the queer community before their brain goes 'ooohh i ship these two characters!'

Is it disappointing someone changed a character who's canonically gay or gay coded or whatever? Yep! Is it worth screaming about and creating a hostile fandom space over, where people need to walk on eggshells? No.

No no no.

Fanfiction is transformative for a mfing reason. Fandom is supposed to encourage creativity. Don't be a dick to people. Oml.

[bilesproblems]

The problem is that you're queerphobic asf and then call anyone who disagrees with you a TERF even if they are transfemme or just in general trans themselves.

You're queerphobic, actually.

A massive part of what queerphobia is, is not understanding someone's identity and choosing to be reactionary and fight someone over your assumptions on what that means rather than ask them why they feel that way. Which you are demonstrating right now by saying whatever word vomit this shit was rather than "can you please explain how being a bi lesbian works?" Queerphobia also heavily involves not being willing to understand someone and their identity. If you were willing to understand, you would, because there is no good reason to not support mspec lesbians that exists, and the only way a person could be unsupportive of bi lesbians is if they're ignorant and don't understand yet, or if they're going out of their way to be gold stars by excluding SAM-using lesbians. The lack of understanding you are demonstrating now simply by saying we're queerphobic for being queer in a way you do not yet understand.

You see the label of bi lesbian. You do not care to inquire. You do not seek to understand. You assume "mspec/bi always includes attraction to men" and forget your history that proves lesbian wasn't ever intended to be exclusive, and sappho of lesbos herself was fucking bi, and so you attack us and call us lesbophobic based on your assumptions when all we did was understand our history better than you and not misgender every nonbinary person who doesn't identify whatsoever as a woman.

Not to mention, you aren't allowed to call yourself queer if you think the rules of labels are strict. They're not. They're loose and they're meant to overlap. That's the point of being queer, to break the rules. You are queerphobic because you are going against the fundamental principles of queerness itself. You have no right to use th word of the weirdos if you shun us. You have no claim to the label for the rule breakers if you think lesbians can't be men or like men because that's "breaking the rules."

It is also horribly queerphobic to be bilesbophobic because bilesbophobia overlaps with many flavors of queerphobia; biphobia, transphobia and enbyphobia, specifically, as well as broader queerphobia (the hatred of and discrimination against identities that are queer. Even those who support SOME queer people can be queerphobic.)

The TERF/Transphobia claims come from several facts

1. The ONE and ONLY reason that the lesbian label currently tends to describe EXCLUSIVE attraction to women and elsegender people is because of TERFS. TERFS decided women who liked men couldn't be lesbians. TERFS decided men were evil. They also tried to get rid of you, dear transfem anon, and both nonbinary lesbians and butches, for being too close to manhood. They didn't succeed, but they did manage to push mspec lesbians and transmasc/trans man lesbians out, and make the label exclusive. These TERFS also tried to separate lesbians from the rest of the queer community. They failed, thankfully.

You are not being called a TERF, but you are being told you are using TERF rhetoric and falling for things TERFS say and TERFS created.

2. Being anti mspec lesbians is the same as hating non-binary people. Even if you are nonbinary yourself, you are hurting yourself and your community. I am a lesbian, exclusively. I have no attraction to men. I am attracted to women and I am attracted to elsegender people. My boyfriend is androgyne, in fact. That is lesbian, but it is bi. You must either say nonbinary people are not included in the lesbian label, making people like me just bi, or that all nonbinary people are women, making me just a lesbian, to not support mspec lesbians. There is no other way to go about it.

3. Multigender people fucking exist. An exclusive lesbian can be attracted to a man if that man is a woman. And if they date, the lesbian could call herself bi or even pan because she's capable of being attracted to all genders, but only if the gender of woman is present.

I am dead certain all your information on bi lesbians is not from bi lesbians. Perhaps you were told it's for lesbians who like trans women. It's not. Or maybe it's because you think we don't accept trans men as real men? We do, we just also accept that sometimes trans men can feel disconnected from cis men and still feel connected to the lesbian label because of their AGAB. It doesn't mean trans men can't be straight. It just means we won't decide for them what label they want to use, if they wanna say that they're straight because they're men who like women or lesbian because historically, transmascs and trans men were accepted in the lesbian community and people who's experiences keep them connected to their AGAB, even if they don't identify with it, will have a different relationship with their labels.

Pipe down. You don't know what you're talking about. I only dignified you with a response to show off my writing abilities to my followers. I don't think you will even read this. I do not care. If you've seen how foolish and queerphobic you were, I'll forgive you, but until then, stay quiet and don't try to tell people things about their identity when you don't understand it and we do. You're arguing with a strawman that you made up and won't listen.

There is nothing queerphobic about acknowledging that you historically belonged in a label. There is nothing queerphobic about using 2 labels because you feel you are in between the two. There is nothing queerphobic about using the split attraction model. There is nothing queerphobic about not misgendering nonbinary people while still not excluding them from the lesbian label. There is nothing queerphobic about breaking rules. There is, however something deeply and inherently queerphobic about not accepting someone's identity simply because it doesn't make sense to you right off the bat. It's not wrong to want to understand before you just accept it, because at least you are open to understanding it, but to call someone queerphobic because you don't understand is exactly what homophobes do, it's exactly what transphobes do, and it's exactly what all queerphobes do.

[flower-zombie-rob]

Dearie you are the dense one for still pushing the lie that J.K. Rowling compared all transgenders to Death Eaters. If you bothered to actually listen to her, she compared the violent and autocratic behavior of people sending her death threats to the Death Eaters. You have some real nerve saying that radical feminists are thick-skulled when you cannot think critically and let your hatred of J.K. Rowling allow you to hear what you want to hear.

I would, once again, like to reitorate that in what context is conparing people to nazi allegorys correct in any circumstance?? If you give me an example of why this is an appropriate comparison in any context, ill listen, but as far as im aware a woman who spends her time actively hating transgender people and spreading false information about them comparing gay rights activists on twitter to fictional eugenicist murderers should be given this benefit of the doubt that you give her.

Also, she had done a plethera of things that her fans are ignoring and giving her this same benefit of the doubt idea of. She actively encourages the dead naming and outing of transgender children to their abusive households by supporting the british governments choices on that matter, in the past she has supported small businesses that sell anti-trans propaganda pins and merchandise, She has attempted to retcon her characters to be gay in an attelpt to be "progressive" while saying that there werewolf curse in her books(a thing that is pretty damn awful and that the antagonist werewolves try to spread among people) is an allegory for HIV(do i even have to explain what that is a bad thing to say??).

I call JK Rowling fans dense because they constantly choose to ignore and deny the fact that she makes her beliefs about transgender and gay people very clear constantly. People who hate her are not making things up, theyre taking what she says and the ways that she says and recieving it in the way that JK means it.

She did not compare all transgenders to death eaters. That is not what I said. Read some more and get that comprehention up "dearie." I said what was accurate, which was that she described lgbt rights activists who attack her as death eaters which are allegories for nazis and that is something she has openly said in the past. She could have said people who attacked her and she could have said people who sent her death threats but she did not. She chose the word's "trans rights activists" and "lgbt rights activists" to describe the people who attack her which actively antagonises all people within that bubble who fight for their rights and disagree with her points.

As with normal jk Rowling fans you believe that every valid criticism of hers is someone spreading a rumour because they simply don't like her but I think you fail to realise why people don't like her.

People do not hate jk Rowling because she fights for womens rights. People hate JK because she is attempting to tear down the trans and gay rights that people have fought for their entire lives for and she is a middle aged straight cis white woman using her massive fanbase to do so. If you really This have the reading comprehension that you are assuming you do in this ask I would please inform you to go and educate yourself on the ways the ways that JK Rowling's actions strongly affect not only trans youth but queer and even poc ans jewish youth today. Also, please stop reading JK rowlings twitter as your source for feminism information, people don't write genderist theory essays every day so you can ignore all reason and listen to JK rowlings version of feminism.

Thank you.

Also for someone who claims to be a radical feminist you certainly aren't against the idea of addressing someone is dearie in a patronising sense, a traditionally feminine patronism uzed against women by older men regularly. Thank you for making me uncomfortable too!

Also also, for someone so passionate about this "dearie" youre very shy in telling me your blog name and url with anon on. Almost like you dont want people to know youre a radfem. Almost like youre ashamed of it. How quaint. I on the other hand am not in any way afraid or ashamed of disliking JK and working to tear down the lies and rumours she spreads about an ultimately marginalised community of people who are attacked from all corners by the influence of people like her.

If you follow me, god help me, please unfollow because i dont want a supporter of a woman who refuses to even acknowledge and be held accountable for her transgender discrimination anywhere near my blog, which is a safe space for all. Please promptly and ploitely get off my blog, thank you.

[asterias-corner]

it’s Wednesday! You know what that means? Ranting about the Mormon church <3 (i have mutual at 7 and idefk what we’re doing)

Was on the ‘ex Mormon’ tag, and i reminded myself of the whole “strength of the youth” program they had with us that one Sunday, here are some of the rules that are official that i had distaste reading and hearing my peers agree with.

(Sorry if it’s hard to read)

They had one on abortion, but i couldn’t find it- all i know is that they were saying it was against god’s commandments or some stupid shi

——-

general conference this year was annoying as all hell, i don’t remember (nor care) who had talked about being celestial, but he kept fucking saying “celestial” and every time i tuned in, I’d hear him say celestial and i was so ready to drive to the fucking conference center and cut the microphone off. Then the next week, of course they have to do the whole after conference lessons, and i found out they had 5 sessions in total?! They always have one for the women, and i hate it.

———-

Mormon girls are assholes and you cannot change my mind. I’m lucky enough to feel pretty confident in my body, despite having self harm scars- and not fitting their standards of an ideal body type. So whenever these fuckers look at me weird, specifically my scars, i want to scream. Also, there are two girls in the group above me, and they both act hella gay with eachother and when called out or called queer, they start to get offended as if they weren’t just cuddling like a married couple two seconds earlier. Girls camp, my first year- they were literally spooning each other and nobody says jack fucking shit. But the second i DARE hold the hand of my friend who was having a panic attack, my mom gets informed and i get lectured. I’m pretty openly queer, so it’s only an issue because they know who I’m attracted too. Or they assume that, they think i like girls and I’m a lesbian, but I’m literally trans and gay, but like hell I’m going to come clean about that. The only reason i enjoy mutual sometimes, is because i like to sneak off and play piano.

————

i used to have a few friends, some girls my age. Then we got into young women’s instead of the activity days class and they all ditched me, well- one did, the others either moved wards or were the age group above me. But every time i open my mouth, I’m instantly treated lowly. I’ve spoken up about this too, to my parents but i can’t talk to them about anything. They protect the Mormon girls all the time, not once trying to understand why I’m upset. I also hate them because they like to judge me specifically, also these other girls who aren’t even fucking Mormon? But one of my leaders brings them to try and convert them into this hell of a cult, which isn’t working btw. But i used to be on the same bus as one of the girls, and she is super annoying, so is the other girl. They swear like a sailor, and i end up getting roped in with getting in trouble because of it. Also the fact i have to look after them and whenever i try and hangout with them, they push me off to the side and judge me.

——-

there’s still a whole truckload of things i didn’t unpack, but let’s save that for Sunday.

moral of the story? I fucking hate the Mormon church, and it shouldn’t exist. The sexism, blatant homophobia and transphobia is stupid as hell.

[nose-bl]

i feel like the reason why some people get so worked up about queer characters being played by cishet (assumed or confirmed) actors is partly because they're applying the same rules that are applied to disabled and BIPOC characters. because yes, when it comes to, say, a Black character, of course you can't cast a white actor. that would be either whitewashing if they make the character white, or blackface if they make the white actor look Black. we all know that is incredibly racist. or when it comes to autistic characters, casting allistic actors to play these characters can quickly become a mockery of autistic traits like it happened in Sia's movie (which wasn't only due to the actress being allistic but also the fact that Sia just......wrote a shit and offensive movie and the actress didn't have a good base to go from)

but when it comes to queer characters these same rules don't apply, not exactly. a cishet actor can play a queer character and can pretend to be this other person, without it being a mockery, without it being offensive. if the actor understands the character and understands queerness, they can do a perfect job

for some people, a cis person playing a trans person of a different gender is very offensive bc it can fall under the stereotype that trans people are just their assigned gender but in disguise to get something (e.g. how trans women are assumed to just be men dressed as women to attack other women, and shit like that). and i agree, to an extent. it can be harmful. but it can also be dealt with very respectfully. an example i like to give is adam from degrassi. while i don't completely like the trans rep in the show (i love it but i also have issues with it hmmm), i do not mind that the trans boy was played by a woman. that didn't affect the quality of the representation at all and, to me at least, it didn't feel offensive

while i agree queer actors deserve more chances and it's really cool when queer characters are played by queer actors, we NEED to stop obsessing over it because we will either harrass a cishet person who is doing a very genuine and good job, who is being respectful, or we might be harrassing closeted queer people